EFFICACY OF PHONOLOGICAL INTERVENTION
PROGRAM IN STUDENTS AT RISK FOR DYSLEXIA
Eficácia de um programa de intervenção fonológica
em escolares de risco para a dislexia
Cláudia da Silva (1), Simone Aparecida Capellini (1)
(1) Departamento de Fonoaudiologia da Faculdade de
Filo-soia e Ciências, Universidade Estadual Paulista “Júlio de Mesquita Filho” – UNESP – Marília (SP), Brasil.
Source: Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientíico e Tecnológico (CNPq)
Conlict of interest: non-existent
The dyslexia can be deined as a speciic learning disorder of the reading that causes diiculties of processing of stimuli linguistic and non-linguistic brief, rapid and successive. However, when thinking about early identiication of students at risk for dyslexia the principal manifestations found are phonological alterations, diiculty in recognizing letters, no association of relation letter/sound, alteration in the discrimination of sounds, diiculty in distinguishing letters with nearby sounds, recurring exchanges in speech and in the initial learning writing3,5,7-9.
The phonological disorder has been pointed out as one of the irst signs of risk for dyslexia, since the phonological skills that should develop naturally and spontaneously were not acquired, which complicates the development of other skills such as analysis, synthesis, segmentation and phonemic
INTRODUCTION
The early identiication of students at risk for dyslexia is a subject discussed in the international literature since the decade of 801,2. However, recent
studies claim that the sooner the principal signs
that characterize dyslexia is identiied, the sooner these students will be placed in the context of the intervention to minimize the characteristics of the framework and its interference in learning of the reading and writing and actually conirm or not the framework of dyslexia 3-6.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: to verify the eicacy of phonological intervention program in students at risk for dyslexia. Methods: participated these study 40 students of the 1st grade level of elementary school, of both
genders, with aged between5 years and 11 months to 6 years and 7 months. The students were divided into two groups: GI (20 students without risk for dyslexia); and GII (20 students with risk for dyslexia), both groups were subjected to phonological intervention program, composed by tasks of identifying of sounds and letters of the alphabet in sequence and random order, identiication and production of rhyme, rhyme production with phrases, identiication and manipulation of words, identiication and production of syllables, syllabic segmentation and analysis, phonemic identiication and segmentation, replacement, synthesis, analysis and phonemic discrimination. In situation of pre and post-testing, all subjects in this study were submitted to the Evaluation Cognitive Linguistic Skills Protocol – collective and individual version. Results: in comparison of the pre with post testing of
the performance of students of GI and GII, was statistical diference for the subtests of the skills of reading, writing, phonological awareness, auditory processing and processing speed, indicating average of superior performance for GII in post testing compared to pre testing. Conclusion: the
phonological intervention program was efective for students at risk for dyslexia because it made possible the development of phonological awareness through intervention, assisting in the acquisition of skills necessary for the learning of reading and writing.
METHODS
This study was submitted and approved for the Ethics Committee from the Faculty of Philosophy and Sciences of São Paulo State University – CEP/ FFC/UNESP – Marília (SP), under protocol nº 686/2009.
Participated in these study 40 students from
1st year of elementary school, 17 (42,5%) female
gender and 23 (57,5%) male gender, with aged between 5 years and 11 months and 6 years and 7 months, were divided into two groups:
Group I (GI): composed of 20 students without
risk for dyslexia that were submitted to phonological intervention program, 10 students of the females and 10 of the males, with aged between 5 years and 11 months to 6 years and 7 months, regularly
registered in the 1st year of elementary school.
We considered students without risk for dyslexia those that presented good academic performance, indicated by teachers following the criterion of satis
-factory performance for two consecutive bimesters, compared to its class group and absence of phono -logical disorder.
Group II (GII): composed of 20 students at risk
for dyslexia that were submitted to phonological intervention program, seven students of the females and 13 males, with aged between 5 years and 11 months to 6 years and 3 months , regularly regis -tered in the 1st year of elementary school.
The students of group GII were identiied among
70 students regularly registered in 1st year of
elementary education at a public school in Marília-SP, through the application of Child Language Test in the areas of phonology, vocabulary, luency and pragmatic – ABFW16 for identiication and conir
-mation of the diagnosis of phonological disorder. To determine the severity of phonological disorder was used the index of Percentage of Correct Consonants – PCC1, this index checks the number of correct
consonants produced in a sample of speech according to the total number of consonants in the sample, which is considered as incorrect consonant, the omissions, substitutions and common and not
common distortions.
Thus, the index of phonological disorder was calculated after classifying phonological processes, the quantity and productivity of each process observed in the speech sample obtained through naming and imitation proofs of the ABFW. This index was calculated with the division the correct consonants emitted by total consonants of the proof multiplied by 100%. That way, phonological disorder was considered mild if the PCC is 85% to 100%, lightly moderate from 65% to 85%, moderately severe in 50% to 65% and severe if lower than 50%.
manipulation9-11, which may inluence the acqui
-sition of the mechanism of phoneme-grapheme conversion for the learning of reading and writing(4,7).
The phonological disorder characterized by disorganization of speech that impairs the language development owing to the presence of substitutions, distortions and omissions of sounds 10. However,
despite being considered the main sign of risk for dyslexia, should be taken into consideration, the other signs, mentioned above, which manifest themselves in the classroom, taking this school to a lower performance relative to their group-class in activities related to reading and writing12,13.
The thematic about early identiication of students at risk for dyslexia and the practice of interventional work is still very recent and developed studies have as its primary focus, the intervention with phonological basis, and have shown good results through of the intervention using activities that involve phonological awareness, among them
stand out the sound perception (rhyme and
allit-eration) and the manipulation of speech segments (segmentation, analysis and synthesis phonemic), beyond the letter/sound relationship4,10.
The early intervention proposes to provide insight
to verify if, after the implementation of speciic programs, involving the stimulation of cognitive-linguistic skills that have been altered or delayed, the students show or no improvement in learning of
reading.
Those who, after submitted to an intervention program, remaining with gaps in skills of phono
-logical awareness, processing speed, visual and auditory processing, and in the letter/sound relationship, suggest a disorder present in the processing, storage and/or access information, which impairs the acquisition and development of perceptive and linguistic skills, should submitted the interdisciplinary evaluation to conirm the manifes
-tation of dyslexia and periodic monitoring order to minimize the deiciencies identiied in the evaluation
process3,14,15.
Thus, based on the specialized literature, as before phonological disorders in school phase is identiied, the faster early intervention programs can be realized by decreasing the impact of this disorder on the reading and writing learning, especially at the beginning of the 1st year of elementary school3.
However, in Brazil, are still few studies that use inter
-vention programs directed for early identiication of dyslexia and, therefore, for tracking of students at risk for dyslexia8,9.
Table 1 – Comparison of the index of gravity of the phonological disorder – PCC in the naming and imitation task
Appointment Degree of severity pre Appointment Degree of severity post Total
1 2
1 16 0 16
80,00% 0,00% 80,00%
2 3 0 3
15,00% 0,00% 15,00%
3 0 1 1
0,00% 5,00% 5,00%
Total 19 1 20
95,00% 5,00% 100,00%
Appointment Degree of severity pre Appointment Degree of severity post Total 1
1 17 17
85,00% 85,00%
2 3 3
15,00% 15,00%
Total 20 20
100,00% 100,00%
Legend: 1: mild; 2: lightly moderate; 3: moderately severe * Signiicant values for the nomination (p=0,125) – Signal Test * Signiicant values for the imitation (p=0,250) – Signal Test
The data collection was realized at the Laboratory of Investigation of Deviations from Learning – LIDA/ UNESP-Marília-SP and started after signing of the Consent Term form by parents or those responsible for students.
All students in this study was submitted the same procedures in situation of pre and post-testing and intervention. The choice of procedures pre and post-testing followed the following criteria: instruments to verify the skill of reading words and pseudowords, phonological skills (rhyme and alliteration), writing skills and auditory processing skills, so they could be evaluated skills worked in the intervention process. Thus, in situation of pre and post-testing, the following procedures were used:
A) Cognitive-Linguistic Performance Test –
collective version17. This version was composed of
the following subtests: recognition of the alphabet in sequence, words dictated and pseudowords and dictation of digits. Besides the subtests cited were added the subtests of recognition of the alphabet in
random order and mute dictation.
B) Cognitive-Linguistic Performance Test –
individual version17. This version was composed of
the following subtests: reading words and non-words, rhyme, alliteration, syllabic segmentation, auditory discrimination, repetition of words and non-words, numbers game inverted, rapid automatized naming pictures and rapid automatic naming of digits. This
version was added subtest rapid automatic naming of colors.
The evaluation tests used in pre and post-testing
were applied in four sessions, with two sessions for pre-testing and two sessions for post-testing, lasting
50 minutes each.
The phonological intervention program was realized in 15 sessions cumulative, in each session was presented a new activity that was worked coupled with the task developed in the previous session, lasting 50 minutes each, twice a week. The stages of phonological intervention program were worked sequentially in the following order: identiication of sounds and letters of the alphabet, identifying of sounds and letters of the alphabet in random order, identiication and production of rhyme, rhyme production with phrases, identii
-cation and manipulation of words, identii-cation and production of syllables, segmentation and analysis syllabic, identiication and segmentation phonemic, substitution, synthesis, analysis and phonemic
discrimination.
The results were statistically analyzed using the program SPSS (Statistical Package for Social
Sciences), in its version 20.0, based on the number
In phonological awareness skill we can verify that there was statistical diference for the subtests of alliteration, rhyme and syllabic segmentation in pre and post-test, suggesting that the interventive work with phonological skills resulted in increased average performance of phonological skills.
For auditory processing, in comparison of the pre with post-testing of GI and GII was found statistical diference in the subtests of discrimi
-nation of sounds, repetition of words and dictation of numbers for pre and post-testing, indicating an improvement in performance of students regarding sound perception, for storage and retrieval of infor
-mation for words and digits.
For the ability of processing speeding, in the comparison of the pre with post- testing between the performance of GI and GII, was found statis
-tical diference for the subtests of rapid naming of igures, irst and second rapid naming of digits in pre
and post-testing. The data suggest improvement
in processing, access and retrieval of visual infor
-mation quickly and successively, both for igures as for digits.
Concerning the performance of students of GII, after phonological intervention, for tests of naming and imitation, we can observe that the students had similar performance when comparing the situations of pre and post-testing.
of signiicance adopted was 5% (0,05) for the appli -cation statistical tests.
RESULTS
In comparison of the pre with post-testing of the performance of students of GI and GII for reading ability, we can verify that occurred statistical diference in subtests of alphabet recognition pre and post-testing, alphabet recognition in random order to pre-testing, words read correctly in one
minute in the pre and post-testing.
The results show that GI and GII had mean scores on superior performance in tests of recog
-nition of the alphabet that relected in the number of words read correctly, even with no statistical diference in the subtests of reading words and not words, the data suggest the inluence of the recog
-nition of alphabet for reading.
For writing skills, in comparison of the pre with post-testing, we found that there was statistical diference in the writing subtest of the alphabet pre and post-testing, word dictation post-testing, no words dictation pre and post-testing, total dictation
pre and post-testing and mute dictation pre and post-testing. The data suggest improvement in the
Table 2 – Distribution of the performance of students of the GI and GII, in pre and post-testing, in the skill of reading and writing
Variable Group Mean
Standard-deviation Minimum Maximum p-value
Alf Pré GIIGI 26,0023,15 0,004,60 26,007,00 26,0026,00 0,000*
Alf Pós GIIGI 26,0025,60 0,001,00 26,0022,00 26,0026,00 0,038*
Alf Al Pré GIIGI 25,8521,40 0,675,55 23,006,00 26,0026,00 0,000*
Alf Al Pós GIIGI 25,8524,60 0,672,85 23,0018,00 26,0026,00 0,071
LP Pré GIIGI 180,75373,45 108,84398,75 60,000,00 1453,00493,00 0,133
LP Pós GIIGI 160,80260,35 239,2295,19 54,000,00 467,00866,00 0,304
LNP Pré GIIGI 56,6591,75 31,0591,91 0,000,00 145,00337,00 0,357
LNP Pós GIIGI 56,7073,35 44,2379,72 13,000,00 217,00294,00 0,935
Cor1m Pré GIIGI 23,1513,00 11,3111,48 0,000,00 40,0037,00 0,010*
Cor1m Pós GIIGI 32,2018,95 10,698,09 12,000,00 40,0040,00 0,000*
E Alf Pré GIIGI 25,8520,75 0,496,46 24,007,00 26,0026,00 0,000*
E Alf Pós GIIGI 26,0024,20 0,003,58 26,0012,00 26,0026,00 0,004*
DitP Pré GIIGI 17,7512,65 4,519,19 8,000,00 26,0028,00 0,065
DitP Pós GIIGI 27,5020,25 3,769,17 16,000,00 30,0030,00 0,000*
DitNP Pré GIIGI 5,152,30 1,762,39 2,000,00 9,007,00 0,000*
DitNP Pós GIIGI 7,553,90 1,232,17 5,000,00 9,007,00 0,000*
DitT Pré GIIGI 30,7014,95 10,665,12 23,000,00 39,0033,00 0,000*
DitT Pós GIIGI 35,0524,15 11,144,63 21,000,00 39,0036,00 0,000*
DM Pré GIIGI 16,955,90 1,994,90 13,000,00 20,0014,00 0,000*
DM Pós GIIGI 18,509,10 1,644,86 15,000,00 20,0016,00 0,000*
Legend: Alf: alphabet, Alf Al: random alphabet, LP: words reading, LPN: no words reading, Cor1m: correct in 1(one) minute, E Alf: writing of the alphabet, DitP: words dictation, DitNP: no words dictation, DM: mute dictation
Table 3 – Distribution of the performance of students of the GI and GII, in pre and post-testing, in the skill of phonological awareness and auditory processement
Variable Group Mean
Standard-deviation Minimum Maximum p-value
Alit Pré GIIGI 18,2012,85 1,614,78 15,000,00 20,0020,00 0,000*
Alit Pós GIIGI 19,9017,45 0,452,19 18,0013,00 20,0020,00 0,000*
Rima Pré GIIGI 17,2511,05 2,293,93 12,003,00 20,0017,00 0,000*
Rima Pós GIIGI 19,8517,40 0,492,04 18,0011,00 20,0020,00 0,000*
SegS Pré GIIGI 8,708,45 1,491,93 4,003,00 10,0010,00 0,876
SegS Pós GIIGI 10,009,65 0,000,67 10,008,00 10,0010,00 0,019*
DS Pré GIIGI 17,4013,80 3,782,53 5,009,00 20,0019,00 0,000*
DS Pós GIIGI 19,5517,65 1,152,56 16,0011,00 20,0020,00 0,000*
RepP Pré GIIGI 4,953,20 0,951,20 3,002,00 6,006,00 0,000*
RepP Pós GIIGI 5,554,75 0,510,91 5,003,00 6,006,00 0,003*
RepNP Pré GIIGI 2,302,40 0,730,68 1,002,00 4,004,00 0,592
RepNP Pós GIIGI 2,452,80 0,610,62 2,002,00 4,004,00 0,065
Núm Pré GIIGI 7,054,45 1,191,96 4,000,00 8,008,00 0,000*
Núm Pós GIIGI 7,506,35 0,691,09 6,004,00 8,008,00 0,001*
NInv Pré GIIGI 3,353,45 1,461,28 0,000,00 6,006,00 0,749
NInv Pós GIIGI 4,054,40 1,231,00 2,002,00 6,006,00 0,375
Legend: Alit: aliteration, SegS: syllabic segmentation, DS: sound discrimination, RepP: words repetition, RepNP: no words repetition, Núm: numbers, NInv: invert numbers
Table 4 – Distribution of the performance of students of the GI and GII, in pre and post-testing, in the skill of speed processement
Variable Group Mean
Standard-deviation Minimum Maximum p-value
NRF Pré GIIGI 43,3050,05 7,287,08 32,0040,00 58,0064,00 0,007*
NRF Pós GIIGI 38,1047,20 5,976,34 23,0034,00 49,0058,00 0,000*
NRN1 Pré GIIGI 43,3054,65 17,688,26 32,000,00 63,0083,00 0,002*
NRN1 Pós GIIGI 39,0554,30 13,256,00 29,0035,00 49,0095,00 0,000*
NRN2 Pré GIIGI 43,4553,65 17,847,63 31,000,00 64,0083,00 0,005*
NRN2 Pós GIIGI 38,3053,95 11,773,91 34,0035,00 47,0087,00 0,000*
NRC Pré GIIGI 73,2583,75 19,3022,30 44,0049,00 116,00117,00 0,155
NRC Pós GIIGI 65,4564,85 14,3813,43 43,0043,00 99,0093,00 0,807
Legend: NRF: rapid naming of igures, NRN1: rapid naming of numbers/irst, NRN2: rapid naming of numbers/second, NRC: rapid naming of colors
* Signiicant values (p≤0,05) – Statistical Mann-Whitney Test
Table 5 – Comparison of the index of gravity of the phonological disorder – PCC in the naming and imitation task after phonological intervention for students of the GII
Appointment Degree of severity pre Appointment Degree of severity post Total
1 2
1 16 0 16
80,00% 0,00% 80,00%
2 3 0 3
15,00% 0,00% 15,00%
3 0 1 1
0,00% 5,00% 5,00%
Total 19 1 20
95,00% 5,00% 100,00%
Appointment Degree of severity pre Appointment Degree of severity post Total 1
1 17 17
85,00% 85,00%
2 3 3
15,00% 15,00%
Total 20 20
100,00% 100,00%
during the acquisition and development of reading and writing22.
In comparison of the pre with post-testing of GI and GII, for auditory processing skills, occurred performance statistically signiicant for the subtests of Discrimination of Sounds, Words Repeating and Sequence Numbers Inverted, indicating that the students have of the group GII sufered inluence of stimuli ofered in this skill.
Studies indicate that the work with phono
-logical awareness exercises inluence in skills that involve the discrimination of acoustic signals (phonemes), assisting in the retention of information in the phonological memory. Thus, activities that involve the repetition of words and pseudowords, and the repetition of sequences, either digits or igures, involve directly the processing of auditory information, the retention and recuperation of information stored for the reproduction stimulus
requested4,6,20,23,24.
For students of the group GII, the ability of discriminate auditory stimuli and of processing auditory information is more compromised due to the frame of phonological disorder, however, when worked the sound discrimination in the early stages of literacy, the diiculty in distinguish and store information for hereafter use them in reading tasks, for example, becomes more efective because the phonological working memory is able to retain and manipulate information temporarily while participating in cognitive tasks such as reasoning,
comprehension and learning25,26.
To Speed Processing Skill the results indicate statistical diferences in comparison of GI and GII, for pre and post-testing, for subtests of Rapid Naming of Figures and Rapid Naming of Digits. The results point to the decrease of average performance, because it is tests evaluated by time necessary spent for its execution. Thus, we can verify that the group GII, also presented average of performance lower than group GI, suggesting a diiculty in prosecute and reproduce visual stimuli, since the tests that evaluate rapid naming seeking to verify the processing of stimuli of form quickly and
successive27,28.
We know that access to phonological infor
-mation of students with phonological disorder is altered, since these students have a disorder of phonological basic that characterizes the condition. The maintenance of the average performance for this population, suggests an overload of phono
-logical memory generated by deicit in phono-logical processing of information, and that can be trans
-ferred to the reading because the reading process requires the processing of symbols (graphemes) at the moment of decoding and their respective
DISCUSSION
The performance comparison of GI and GII indicates that students of the group GII had superior performance in reading tests after work directed of the correspondence letter/sound, developed in subtests of Alphabet Recognition and Alphabet Recognition in random order associated with the sound. This result indicates that the work involving the letter/sound relationship, explicitly favors the performance of students with alterations in sound perception in skills necessary for the acquisition of reading, also directing, for a close relationship between the development of phonological sensitivity in early stages of the literacy process as a booster of reading15,18.
In comparison of the pre with post-testing of the groups for writing skill, the students of GI and GII showed mean of superior performance. The results refer to an inluence of phonological skills, that helped in the coding process of words and not words. Thus, studies indicate that, phonological awareness when worked in the early grades literacy allows, with use of letter/sound association the access to phonological memory for word formation, which may be recovered during the writing, because students with deicit phonological, when inserted in interventional programs with instruction of phono -logical aspects tend to overcome errors until then
imperceptible to this type of population, relecting still, in the acquisition of writing11,19.
The increase in average of right answers for the subtests of Rhyme, Alliteration and Syllable Segmentation come from the work realized with the program of phonological intervention. It was found, also, that the increase in average right answers on the subtests of this ability, for students of the GII, did not reach the average performance of students of GI. The diiculty phonological of students at risk for dyslexia in realize this type of test suggests a deicit in the phonological representation, because a disor
-ganization in access to phonological processing of information or the lack of ability to manipulate repre -sentations in cognitive level higher6,15,20.
Recent studies indicate that persistent diiculty in manipulate, processing, producing and repro
-ducing phonological segments, over time, in the early grades literacy, may be indicative of a deicit in phonological memory and fast access of phono
-logical information, leading to diiculties decoding in reading the subsequent series5,15,20,21. Thus, it is
phonological system and resulting in problems in learning of the reading and writing.
Furthermore, the use of model response to intervention can be used as a diagnostic criterion for the early identiication of dyslexia, but can also assist with the understanding that the problems with learning to read and write can be a result of lack of education formal classroom, of the alphabetic principle of the writing system of the Portuguese language, which reinforces that, using this model can encourage real identifying which school has or not the manifestation of dyslexia.
CONCLUSION
The results of this study allow us to conclude that the Phonological Intervention Program was efective for students at risk for dyslexia, since, enabled the development of phonological awareness with inter
-ventive work, assisting in the acquisition of skills necessary for acquisition of the reading and writing.
Thus, the phonological intervention relected positively on the performance of these students in phonological awareness tasks, itself, as well as auditory processing and processing speed, since the proposed activities aided in perception, identii
-cation, manipulation and segmentation of phonemes and syllables, and these predictive abilities to the
literacy process.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The National Council for Scientiic and Technological Development (CNPq) for supporting
the research.
relationship to the phoneme to which reading occurs luently21,29,30.
For tests of naming and imitation, students of the GII showed similar performance, evidenced by the indexes of the PCC, before and after application of phonological intervention program, suggesting that
the strategies developed in the intervention did not
help directly in the improvement of phonological disorder, however we must consider that the proposal of the intervention program is not working aspects of orality, and yes, demonstrate that students at risk for dyslexia have phonological disorders.
The program has showed itself efective because, after application of the phonological intervention for students at risk for dyslexia, it was veriied that of 20 students with phonological disorder (100%), only three students (15%) continued to show phono
-logical disorder together with the diiculties in the recognition of letters, no association of relation letter/ sound, alteration in the discrimination of sounds and letters with base on the diiculty of distinguishing
the contrastive traits.
Thus, we may consider that 15% of students who continued to show the diiculties presents in the pre-testing, at the moment of post-testing, present a possible manifestation of dyslexia, since the lack of response to intervention is one of the irst criteria diagnoses of dyslexia for these students at risk3,5,7-9.
8. Silva C, Fukuda MTM, Capellini SA. Intervenção precoce em escolares de risco para a dislexia. In: Capellini SA, Silva C, Pinheiro FH, organizadores. Tópicos em transtornos de aprendizagem. São José dos Campos: Pulso, 2011. p. 90-102.
9. Fukuda MTM, Capellini SA. Programa de intervenção fonológica associado à correspondência grafema-fonema em escolares de risco para a dislexia. Psicol Rel Crít. 2012;25(4):783-90.
10. Savill NJ, Thierry G. Reading for sound with dyslexia: Evidence for early orthographic and late phonological integration deicits. Dev Brain Res. 2011;1385:192-205.
11. Wang LC, Yang HM, Tasi HJ, Chan SY. Learner-generated drawing for phonological and orthographic dyslexic readers. Res Dev Disabil. 2013;34:228-33. 12. Boets B, Wounters J, van Wieringen A, Ghesquiére P. Auditory processing, speech perception and phonological ability in pre-school children at high-risk for dyslexia: a longitudinal study of the auditory temporal processing theory.
Neuropsychol. 2007;45(8):1608-20.
13. Raschle MN, Zuk J, Gaab N. Functional characteristics of developmental dyslexia in left-hemispheric posterior brain regions predate reading onset. Proc Natl Academic.
2012;1252(1):43-50.
14. Reynolds CR, Shaywitz SE. Response to intervention: Ready or not? Or, from wait-to-fail
REFERENCES
1. Shriberg LD, Kwiatkowski J. Phonological disorders: I: A diagnostic classiication system. J.
Speech Lang Hear Res. 1982;47:226-41.
2. Broom YM, Doctor EA. Developmental phonological dyslexia: a case study of the eicacy of a remediation program. Cognitive Neuropsychol. 1995;12(7):725-66.
3. Fletcher J, Vaughn S. Response to intervention: Preventing and remediating academic diiculties. Child Dev Perspectiv. 2009;3(1):30-7.
4. Macoir J, Fossard M, Saint-Pierre MC, Auclair-Ouellet N. Phonological or procedural dyslexia: Speciic deicit of complex grapheme-to-phoneme conversion. J Neuroling. 2012;25:163-77.
5. Lonigan CJ, Purpura DJ, Wilson SB, Walker PM, Clancy-Menchetti. Evaluating the components of an emergent literacy intervention for preschool children at risk for reading diiculties. J Exp Child Psychol.
2013;114:111- 30.
6. Toll AWM, van Luit JEW. Accelerating the early numeracy development of kindergartners with limited working memory skills through remedial education. Res Dev Disabil. 2013;34:745-55. 7. Piasta SB, Wagner RK. Learning letter names and sounds: Efects of instruction, letter type, and phonological processing skill. J Exp Child Psychol.
2010;105:324-44.
RESUMO
Objetivo: veriicar a eicácia de um programa de intervenção fonológica em escolares de risco para
a dislexia. Métodos: participaram desse estudo 40 escolares do 1º ano do ensino fundamental, de
ambos os gêneros, com idade entre 5 anos e 11 meses a 6 anos e 7 meses. Os escolares foram divididos em dois grupos: GI (20 escolares sem risco para dislexias) e GII (20 escolares com risco para dislexia), ambos os grupos foram submetidos ao programa de intervenção fonológica, composto por tarefas de identiicação dos sons e das letras do alfabeto em sequência e em ordem aleatória, identiicação e produção de rima, produção de rima com frases, identiicação e manipulação de pala
-vras, identiicação e produção de sílabas, segmentação e análise silábica, identiicação e segmen
-tação fonêmica, substituição, síntese, análise e discriminação fonêmica. Em situação de pré e pós
--testagem, todos os sujeitos desse estudo foram submetidos à aplicação do Protocolo de Avaliação das Habilidades Cognitivo-Liguísticas – versão coletiva e individual. Resultados: na comparação da
pré com a pós-testagem do desempenho dos escolares de GI e GII, houve diferença estatística para os subtestes das habilidades de leitura, escrita, consciência fonológica, processamento auditivo e velocidade de processamento, indicando média de desempenho superior para GII na pós-testagem comparada a pré-testagem. Conclusão: o programa de intervenção fonológica foi eicaz para os
escolares de risco para a dislexia, pois, possibilitou o desenvolvimento da consciência fonológica por meio do trabalho interventivo, auxiliando na aquisição das habilidades necessárias para o aprendi -zado da leitura e da escrita.
instruction in children with reading disabilities. J Learn Disabil. 2010;41(1):24-47.
24. Romero-Díaz A, Penaloza-López Y, García-Pedroza F, Pérez SJ, Camacho WC. Central auditory processes evaluated with psychoacoustic
test in normal children. Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp. 2011;62(6):418-24.
25. Ferrante C, Borsel JV, Pereira MMB. Análise dos processos fonológicos em crianças com desenvolvimento fonológico normal. Rev Soc Bras Fonoaudiol. 2009;14(1):36-40.
26. Brito CLR, Uzêda CPQ, Vieira JG, Cavalheiro LG. Habilidades de letramento após intervenção fonoaudiológica em crianças do 1° ano do ensino fundamental. Rev Soc Bras Fonoaudiol. 2010;15(1):88-95.
27. Buján A, Lindín M, Díaz F. The efect of aging
on movement related cortical potentials during
a face naming task. International J Psychoph. 2010;78:169-78.
28. Piai V, Roelofs A, Schriefers H. Semantic interference in immediate and delayed naming and reading: Attention and task decisions. J Mem Lang.
2011;64:404-23.
29. Furnes B, Samuelsson S. Phonological awareness and rapid automatized naming predicting
early development in reading and spelling: Results
from a cross-linguistic longitudinal study. Learn Individ Difer. 2011;21:85-95.
30. Tenório SMPCP, Ávila CRB. Processamento fonológico e desempenho escolar nas séries iniciais do ensino fundamental. Rev CEFAC.
2012;14(1):30-8.
to watch-them-fail. School Psychol Q. 2009;24(2):130-49.
15. Cunningham A, Carroll J. Age and schooling efects on early and phoneme awareness. J Exp Child Psychol. 2011;109:248-55.
16. Andrade CRF, Bei-Lopes DM, Fernandes FDM, Wertzner HF. Teste de linguagem infantil nas áreas de fonologia, vocabulário, luência e pragmática – ABFW. Carapicuiba: Pró- Fono; 2002.
17. Capellini SA, Smythe I. Protocolo de avaliação de habilidades cognitivo-linguísticas. Livro do proissional e do professor. Marília: Fundepe; 2008. 18. Silva C, Capellini SA. Eicácia do programa de remediação fonológica e leitura no distúrbio de aprendizagem. Pró-Fono Rev Atual Cient.
2010;22(2):131-8.
19. Machado AC, Capellini SA. Caracterização do desempenho de crianças com dislexia do desenvolvimento em tarefas de escrita. Rev Bras Crescimento e Desenvolvimento Hum. 2011;21(1):133-9.
20. Sarver DE, Rapport MD, Koler MJ, Scanlan SW, Raiker JS, Altro TA et al. Attention problems, phonological short-term memory, and visuospatial short-term memory: Diferential efects on near-and
long-term scholastic achievement. Learn Individ
Difer. 2012;22:8-19.
21. Jones MW, Branigan HP, Hatzidaki A, Obregón M. Is the naming deicit in dyslexia a misnomer?
Cognition. 2010.
22. Silva C. Programa de intervenção fonológica com escolares de risco para a dislexia: Elaboração e Avaliação [tese]. Marília: Faculdade de Filosoia e Ciência da Universidade Estadual Paulista; 2013. 23. Swanson HL, Kehler P, Jerman O. Working memory, strategy knowledge, and strategy
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1982-021620151760215 Received on: January 20, 2015
Accepted on: August 28, 2015
Mailing address:
Cláudia da Silva
Rua Goiás, 391, apto. 22
Edifício Boungainville – Cascata – Marília – SP CEP: 17509-140
